Paul's Necessary Sin: The Experience of Liberation - Pauline Christianity = PaleoChristianity

[Breo]

Timothy Ashworth. Paul's Necessary Sin: The Experience of Liberation (Kindle Locations 5689-5691). Routledge. Kindle Edition.

It seems to me Ashworth's ability to understand this subtle but important distinction stems from the fact that he must have experienced some form of this transformation himself.

Ashworth writes about this transformative experience in his introduction to the book (quoted here in this thread) which then led him to delve into the subject and present a very different translation of Paul than which has previously existed.

 

[Joe]

I went to a Franciscan high school and their prayer used to be one of my favorite things. In times when I feel too self-focused when I really should be finding energy for others, I've prayed substituting "Lord" with "Divine Cosmic Mind" and it was always useful:

[Oh Divine Cosmic Mind], make me an instrument of your peace.
Where there is hatred, let me bring love.
Where there is offense, let me bring pardon.
Where there is discord, let me bring union.
Where there is error, let me bring truth.
Where there is doubt, let me bring faith.
Where there is despair, let me bring hope.
Where there is darkness, let me bring your light.
Where there is sadness, let me bring joy.
O [Divine Cosmic Mind], let me not seek as much
to be consoled as to console,
to be understood as to understand,
to be loved as to love,
for it is in giving that one receives,
it is in pardoning that one is pardoned,
it is in dying [in you] that one is raised to eternal life.

I learned this too because it was regularly sung at mass. Here's an nice rendition by a school choir.

 

[luc]

I was thinking about how one could put some of Paul's/Ashworth's core ideas into simple and modern words. So here is an attempt, fwiw:

We all have (hopefully) some moral intuition. For example, we all kind of know instinctively that slaughtering children is bad. But the problem is that except for such far-out examples that have nothing to do with our lives anyway, we have completely buried and drowned our moral intuition. The reason is that we don't like its advice if it has anything to do with our specific life and situation. Therefore we have created a whole array of buffers and rationalizations that literally make us deaf to this inner voice. We exclude it from the get-go, because it would require from us effort & suffering.

Moral intuition is basically what we get if we ask ourselves, honestly and deeply: what is the right action in this situation? Is what I'm doing the right thing? Was it right what I did back then? The "inner answer" is a feeling of extreme subtlety. It's the slightest pang in this or that direction when we contemplate certain options. It's the subtle forming of an answer in connection with a distant and slight feeling. It's so fragile that the slightest lie, the slightest, hidden aversion against the advice of this intuition, will immediately smash and bury it. And since as a rule we want to avoid effort and suffering at all costs, we pretty much bury this instinct/intuition all the time. This is our default state.

Now, the transformation Paul speaks of is the sudden melting away of some of these buffers we have built. Suddenly, we hear our inner voice - the moral intuition - clearly, for the very first time. And it smashes us, because it judges. And without the buffers, its judgement falls on us like a giant hammer - we see something real in us for the first time, and it's not pretty. We see how immoral and pathetic we are, and how bad we behaved in the past. We see all the cruel and silly justifications and rationalizations we have engaged in and which still control us. It's a massive shock. Hence Paul speaks of it as a liberation, but also a death. If we bear the suffering, the clear vision of our sins past and present then compels us to change and make the required efforts - do what we never have done before, against all inner resistance. This experience puts us in touch with our moral intuition (or inner light, or prophetic Word of God, in more archaic terms), which we no longer completely bury, because we are not afraid anymore of what it says: we know the suffering and effort that is required to carry out its advice, and we are prepared to bear it again. We are prepared to stand steady when the inner voice says we should choose the option we least like. (Hence struggle against inner resistance is so important - it prepares us for listening to our conscience, as "unpopular" as its rulings might be.)

But of course we are by no means perfect at this point, and there are still tons of buffers that drown out that inner voice. We are not mere children anymore, but still "infants in Christ". Here, the congregation (=community, network) plays a decisive role. We all have different buffers and blind spots, so in a community where people are more or less in touch with their moral intuition/inner voice, one way or another, there will always be people who don't share our particular blind spots/buffers and give us sound feedback/speak the prophetic word of God. This "builds up the church" and helps us develop. But it's not pleasant either and it means we have to either accept the feedback and burn away our buffer(s), or to reject the group, or rationalize that the feedback (or teaching) doesn't apply to us. If done right however, we help each other get ever more in touch with our inner connection to the divine, ever more ready to follow its advice, and ever more capable of doing it every moment, even in the smallest everyday decision.

The initial transformation is crucial - the initial beam of light that penetrates the crust of our emotional and intellectual buffers which shelter us completely from our divine connection. Without that, all we can do is follow some moral code, which hopefully protects us from the grossest transgressions, but we will always depend on society enforcing the code in some way. Otherwise it will just disappear the moment society abandons the code, as we can see happening now. Some people may deeply internalize the moral code, and so it might work even when society doesn't enforce it anymore, but such people are still not in touch with their moral intuition/divine connection.

Side note: the Cs said the programming will be complete eventually. I started this post with the universal moral intuition that slaughtering children is bad - well, nowadays even this intuition is buried under a pile of buffers and rubbish, if you think about post-birth abortions...

Anyway, I think this book is such an incredible key to understanding Christianity, and to separate the wheat from the chaff in the various denominations!

 

[Cosmos]

Here, the congregation (=community, network) plays a decisive role. We all have different buffers and blind spots, so in a community where people are more or less in touch with their moral intuition/inner voice, one way or another, there will always be people who don't share our particular blind spots/buffers and give us sound feedback/speak the prophetic word of God. This "builds up the church" and helps us develop. But it's not pleasant either and it means we have to either accept the feedback and burn away our buffer(s), or to reject the group, or rationalize that the feedback (or teaching) doesn't apply to us. If done right however, we help each other get ever more in touch with our inner connection to the divine, ever more ready to follow its advice, and ever more capable of doing it every moment, even in the smallest everyday decision.

Reminds me; One of the things that stood out for me so far in Ashworth's book is his interpretation of the "prophetic word" as it was understood by Paul. It seems to me that the way Paul meant/understood this phrase was radically different to how many ordinary people back then and today think of it. Rather than something externally/superficially spoken/imposed by a "Prophet" to the disciple, it seems Paul understood it as the inner voice of good/truth that everyone can choose to develop/listen to and express and share with others through words and actions.

Found it quite fascinating that Paul rather explicitly understood the "prophetic word" as something that comes from within (the voice of conscience/decency/truth/outside/objective perspective?) and can shine through and/or be heard/expressed by and through EVERYONE in the community at any given time (not just the prophet). Which makes pretty much everyone in such a group a prophet at any given time. It almost seems like he described the power of networking with a co-linear group there, in which every member of the network can see different aspects of the truth at any given moment and express it in order for the whole group and each member in it to develop.

 

[genero81]

the Cs said the programming will be complete eventually.

I think the "programming" is complete. And I think it's very much rooted in this conceptually closed system that denies anything higher than the material plane. That forms the groundwork, so to speak, and then this false morality is mandated through ideologues and their 'it's our way or the highway' bully tactics. But no matter how well the program has been established or "completed," not everyone is going to buy into it.

Interestingly, I think there's always going to be this balancing mechanism in play so that the harder 'they' push for total control, the greater the potential for the sort of transforming experience Ashworth is deducing from Paul's writings. It is more than possible to see things for what they are, and to begin to be led by the spirit and so go against what Soren Kierkegaard calls the "universal" (the accepted ethical code of the time) in "Fear and Trembling' because one is led by faith and hears "the prophetic word of God" through an awakened conscience.

There just needs to be people like us who can point the way to the door so that people can become aware that such a possibility exist. OSIT

 

[Altair]

I read recently several recommended books about Caesar and for me it's more clear now what Paul could have meant by "Faith OF Jesus".
During the Gallic and Civil wars Caesar was in numerous situations which appeared to be incredibly desperate. But Caesar, standing under enormous political and military pressure and having an enormous responsibility of thousands of his soldiers, had not only managed to find a way-out out of the direst situations but also to inspire his soldiers to follow him. It really looked like that he had an enormous faith "in the process", in what he had to accomplish and that by "staying true to his nature" he trusted to receive guidance (from something higher). As Caesar put it:

Fortune, which has a great deal of power in other matters but especially in war, can bring about great changes in a situation through very slight forces.

But:

If fortune doesn’t go your way, sometimes you have to bend it to your will.

As darkness deepened, the wind howled from the west and threatened to overturn the tiny craft. The captain was no coward, but he knew they were risking their lives in the storm and ordered his crew to reverse course. Caesar then stood up and threw off his cloak revealing his true identity. The captain was now terrified of his passenger as well as the waves, but Caesar took him by the hand and urged him to abandon all hesitation: “Come now, my friend, be brave and fear nothing, for you carry Caesar and Caesar’s good luck in your boat.”

Freeman, Philip. Julius Caesar (p. 272). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

 

[gnosisxsophia]

...by "staying true to his nature" he trusted to receive guidance (from something higher).

Yes there’s certainly a sense of Socrates’ ‘Daemon’ woven around the man isn’t there?

In addition to Caesar’s self-professed belief in his personal luck is a series of encounters with Fortuna that added to the legend of Caesar as well as the prominence of Fortuna. In his own commentaries, as well as letters to Cicero, Fortuna appears as a consistent figure rather than a generic notion.The famous sea crossing, which records Caesar in the company of Fortuna...

Intimately bound to not only Fortuna but Victoria (and obviously Venus) it does seem striking the stories of Caesar sacrificing bulls to the goddess (male animals to female deities apparently uncommon), and not Jove?

Extraordinary really considering his role as Pontifex Maximus!

The Julian claim to descent from the goddess played an important role in Caesar’s eventual control over her martial attributes. His well-advertised lineage therefore surpassed any competing claims to her favour. Caesar’s construction of the Forum Iulium and the Temple of Venus Genetrix was designed to broadcast this ancestral connection on an unprecedented public scale, but Venus’ martial attributes were not ignored in this complex. Ultimately, the Forum Iulium and its Temple of Venus Genetrix functioned as a permanent reminder of Caesar’s power and position in the state as the result of the goddess’ patronage...

More so in light of the provision for men to ‘swear by his Genius’ -

In ancient Rome, the genius (plural in Latin genii) was the guiding spirit or tutelary deity of a person, family (gens)...The noun is related to the Latin verbs"gignere" (to beget, to give birth to) and "generare" (to beget, to generate, to procreate), and derives directly from the Indo-European stem thereof: "ǵenh" (to produce, to beget, to give birth).

Which all sounds very un-Patrician to me - yet does bring to mind -

A: ...it is honorable to bow before the author of the force for good.

Even if the practicalities of the concept frustrate me no end...

 

[Ennio]

This fascinating book was the focus of our latest MindMatters video. We hope that everyone who's been following this thread (and so much that seems to be connected to it!) gets to watch and enjoy it.

MindMatters: Necessary Sin - What Was The Apostle Paul Really Saying About The Nature of Spiritual Transformation?

One of the earliest, most eloquent, and most influential of all advocates for Christianity was the Apostle Paul; his letters are widely quoted the world over. After many centuries of translation, interpretation and analysis, bible scholars and historians have continuously pored over his writings to uncover just what the ancient figure meant, what he truly believed, and what he was trying to convey to the various communities he was reaching out to during the times in which he lived. But have they been correct? In his book Paul's Necessary Sin - The Experience of Liberation, Timothy Ashworth presents a new, coherent and consistent rendering of Paul's central ideas that breathes new life and understanding into what are probably the most famous letters ever written.

This week on MindMatters we discuss Ashworth's book and its rigorous examination of Paul's thoughts on a range of themes: The life of the spirit - as opposed to the 'law', the materialistic identification that individuals have with the self, his understanding of 'The Fall' and the potential for humanity's ultimate redemption, among others. Join us as we look at some of the deepest and most perennial themes and questions that have been asked since, well, Adam and Eve.

 

[Stoneboss]

Excellent show. I thought it was a really good, sort of 'introduction', to explain the method that Ashworth used to convey what Paul was really saying. I especially liked Cory's closing remarks about what he sincerely thought about faith and God, and how we ought to be, as soldiers, living in 'seeing the unseen'. I'm looking forward to the next one!

 

[luc]

Here is an excerpt from Stainton Moses' Spirit Teaching which I found jives well with Paul's thought, especially the emphasis on "hearing God's word" as opposed to "hearing the gospel" as preached by the church. Interestingly, this section follows a long elaboration on the importance and practice of prayer, which is a means to get in touch with the divine and move closer to it. The general context here is Stainton Moses (a theologian and former priest) struggling to reconcile orthodox Christian teachings with what he received in his channeling sessions:

[I made no rejoinder to what was last said, but I thought over it, and was preparing to say somewhat, when I was imperiously stopped. The hand dashed off with violent speed, and the communication following was written without pause in an incredibly short space of time. So vehement was the effort that I was in a state of semi- trance until it was complete.]

Stay! stay! stay! Attempt not now to argue, but learn yet again of the truth. You are impatient, and it is in your mind to say foolish things. What matters it to you if what we say contradicts that which others have believed? Why shrink back at that? Does not all faith firmly grasped contradict some other faith? Nay, does not each faith contain within itself elements of contradiction? If you know not so much as that, then are you not fit to go forward. From those old creeds and faiths, venerable in their antiquity, but crude too frequently in development, men have derived comfort. They have found their utterances convenient and suitable for them. They have derived from them a satisfaction which they do not bring to you. Why? Because your spirit has outgrown those old, and to you lifeless, utterances. They benefit you not. They are powerless to stir your soul. They have no voice for your spirit: no remedy for your wants. They are but faint and far-off echoes of what to some was a living voice, but which to you is cold and meaningless.

Why, then, perplex yourself at that? Why linger, striving in vain to extract a meaning from that which to you has none? Why turn a deaf ear to a living voice which cries to your soul from the land beyond in accents which are living, burning, true? Why refuse to listen when the voice speaks of the true, the spiritual, the noble, of all that is real and actual in place of the dying or the dead? Why, for a fancy--from reverence for a lifeless past--cut yourself off from the living present, from the communion of spirits, from the society of those who can tell you noble truths of God and of your destiny?

Surely this is but madness, only the influence of spirits who would gladly hold back the soul and drag it down to earth. Were our revelation a blank contradiction of the old, what is that to you? Ours speaks in living accents to your spirit; you know it; you drink in it, and find it to be a blessed influence. The old is dead to you. Why linger round the lifeless form? Why embrace the mouldering corpse which was once a living being instinct with Divine truth?

Your sacred records tell you how, at the sepulchre of Jesus, the angel message to the sorrowing friends was one of aspiration. "Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, He is risen." So, friend, we say to you: Why linger in the dead past, the sepulchre of buried truth, seeking, in fruitless sorrow, for that which is no longer there? It is not there, it is risen. It has left the body of dogmatic teaching which once for a restless age enshrined Divine truth. There remains but the dead casket. The jewel is gone. The spirit has risen, and lo! we proclaim to you sublime truth, a nobler creed, and a Diviner God.

The voice which in ages past has sounded in the ears of those to whom has been entrusted the Divine mission on their earth and to their generation reaches even to this age and to you. It has ever been so. God deals now in no other sort than He has ever dealt with men. He calls them up to fuller light, to higher truth. It is theirs to accept or to reject the heavenly message. Probably it has been to each aspiring soul a difficulty that the past, the familiar, the venerable faith has charms from which it is hard to sever. In the first blush of perplexity it seems to the bewildered spirit that all must go that is old and cherished, and the new and untried must be accepted. It seems to be a death; and man shrinks from death. Yes; but it is a death unto life. It is a passage through the tomb to a land of life and hope. Even as the spirit soars in freedom from the body of death from which it has been emancipated, so does the enfranchised spirit, set free from the trammels of the past, soar aloft in liberty, the liberty of the truth which, Jesus said, alone can make man free. You know it now; but you shall know it hereafter.

This, then, is our cry to you. Why turn your face to the dead past, when the living present and the bright future attract, and promise rich store of blessing? Were we in our mission the absolute contradiction of the old, what is that to you? The old words are spiritless, and you cannot infuse into them again the spirit that is gone. Leave them to those for whom they still have a voice and a meaning, and follow with unfaltering step the impulses of the Divine Spirit which lures you on to higher views of truth. Quit the dead past, though it be to journey through a new present to an unknown future.

But, friend, it is not so. The past casts a glamour over you, and you share the common idea that the new must utterly destroy the old. Did Jesus so say? Did He counsel the abolition of the Mosaic teaching? Yet, as we have before said, our teaching is no more startling development as compared with His than was His as compared with Moses'. That which we present for your acceptance is the complement rather than the contradiction of the old; the growth to a fuller stature; the development of a wider knowledge.

If you meditate deeply on the state of the world when Jesus proclaimed to it His reformed faith, you will see many points of similarity to that which now obtains among men. It is not, we reiterate, more startling to read the gospel which we preach alongside of that which passes current among men for religion, than it was to put the gospel of Jesus in juxtaposition to the ritual of Pharisaism, or the sceptical indifferentism of Sadducee. The world then needed a new revelation, even as it does now; and that which it received was not less startling than is this to those who love the old, and desire not to be stirred from the paths to which they are accustomed.

In those days, even as now, the revelation of God, which had been adapted to the special wants of a special people, had been overlaid with rubbish, until it had become a mass of ritual without a meaning and without life. For many long years the voice of God had not been heard, and man had begun to crave, as he craves now, for a renewal of the Divine message. The old had become dead, and he sought for a new and living voice. It came to him--this Divine utterance--in the voice of Jesus; from a source the most unlikely, as men think; from a quarter least calculated to command respect of the educated Pharisee, or to carry conviction to the scoffing Sadducee. Yet that voice prevailed, and for 1800 years has animated the religious life of Christendom. The creed so originated has become debased, but the spirit of the Crucified is in it even now; and it needs but the vivifying touch to call it forth into new life. The old rags with which man has thought to clothe it may readily be thrown aside, and the truth shine all the brighter for their loss.

The source from which our revelation comes is not more strange that was the source of that power wielded by Him who was to His generation the despised carpenter of Nazareth. Men sneered at Him in the plenitude of their scorn; even as they sneer at us. They were ready to stare at His marvels; they would follow Him in hosts to marvel at the physical miracles which were wrought through Him; but they were not sufficiently spiritual to drink in His teachings. They are ready now to wonder at us and our mighty works, even as they wondered then. Even as then they sought for yet further and further tests--"Come down from the cross, and we will believe on thee"--so now there is even one more test which is necessary to ensure complete conviction. They called Him a deceiver, even as they cry out now. They hooted Him out of their society; they drove Him out of their midst, and they strove by their laws and by their influence to crush out the new doctrine from their land. New it was indeed, but the truth that it enshrined was old, old as the God who gave it, only new in form. Ours is new now, but the time shall come when men shall see that it is but the risen truth of ages past, rejuvenescent and eternal.

The Divine truth which we proclaim is not more strange to you than was the message of Jesus to His age--the age that sneeringly asked whether any educated person of position and respectability--"any of the Pharisees or the rules"--had believed on Him. Both were progressive developments of the same continuous stream of truth, suited to the wants and cravings of those to whom they were vouchsafed. Meditate on the mental condition of Nicodemus, and contrast it with that of many such in your own day. And be assured that the same power which availed to stir the dead faith of the Jew, and to reveal his God more clearly, is still able to infuse new life into the well-nigh lifeless body of Christian faith, and to restore it to energy and vitality.

May the All-wise guide, bless, and keep you.

This is from section 13, the whole thing is online here: Spirit Teachings by Stainton Moses

 

[gnosisxsophia]

Thanks Ennio,

Looking forward to it

The title is like a poke in the eye though as I continue to wrestle with feminine inspiration...

A couple of useful books for expanding the information field are Robert M. Price's "The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man" and "The Amazing Colossal Apostle" about Paul and which has a lot of side info about Simon Magus.

God love her

Mainly regarding Corinthians though and the deployment of 'Sophia-isms' by Paul, particularly the very Gnostic sounding ‘We speak God's wisdom in a mystery...we teach the hidden wisdom’ dialogue?

The term ‘Sophia’ being grammatically feminine in both Hebrew and Aramaic and obviously in the Gnostic arena the term describing nothing less than ‘the fallen bride of god’ - the Ennoia herself - coincidentally historical Simon's, ‘Helen’.

A correlation that then makes the phrasing (in Greek) utilised by Paul, to me anyway, quite striking!


Yet (de) to those (auto) who are called (klētos), both (te) Jews (Ioudaios) and (kai) Greeks (Hellēn), Christ (Christos) is the power (dynamis) of God (theos) and (kai) the wisdom (Sophia) of God (theos).


Which also sounds rather like Steiner’s ‘Sophia as Cosmic Intelligence’ idea, reminiscent too of his philosophies regarding it being imperative to find 'Sophia' (lower), as 'she' is the gateway to 'Christ'?

And incidentally, the ONLY thing I enjoyed about Price's 'The Search for the Historical Paul' happened to be the chapter devoted to Simon the Magician - and that mainly due to 'his' girlfriend.

By far the most interesting character in the text for mine, such that I even went looking for evidence of this gloriously provocative 'Helen' - 'The Bad Samaritan'.

Though my eyes nearly fell out my head when I stumbled across -

In the summers of 1931 and 1932, a team of Anglo-American excavators working in Samaria-Sebaste discovered, in a patchwork of fields and fruit orchards, a deserted sanctuary. Scattered around the perimeter of the sanctuary were the broken remains of a statue which had been smashed into a number of pieces. The sorry sculpture had once been a lovely woman. Draped in a chiton and a himation (a looped layer of clothing hung over the left shoulder and under the right) she cut a distinguished figure. On her head was a stephane (a wreathe or a crown) and a delicate veil. In her left hand she carried a pomegranate and an ear of wheat or barley, in her right a huge torch which blazed above her head and reached right down to the ground. She was labelled simply Kore – ‘girl’.

Traces of paint on the stonework demonstrated that the stone figure had once been carefully decorated. On the wreath were hints of green. Red tinges still visible on the flame of the torch and on the veil could well have been the base for gilding. At some point, the girl’s clothes too had been richly coloured. The carved letters of the inscription she stood above had been freshly touched up.

But someone had found this handsome creature deeply offensive. In fury or fear they had brutally violated her. The leader of the excavations, Professor J.W. Crowfoot, found her head and part of the torch in a cistern, hard up against the enclosure wall. The rest of the torch and her right hand were missing. The breaks in the stone were clean and violent. Scattered around the temple were fifty or so candlestick lamps – evidence of some kind of abandoned cultic activity.

Clearly this girl was thought to be potent – at least quasi-divine. Grain is a symbol of fertility, and pomegranates of death and sex. Although Helen’s association with these powerful indices would not be surprising, any number of divinities could lay claim to the same attributes. The pomegranate and grain alone are insufficient diagnostics but the torch is a clue that this figure might have some connection with the Spartan queen. At this point in time, thanks partly to Virgil’s striking description in the
Aeneid where Helen stands on the towers of Troy, welcoming the Greeks into the city with an enormous lit firebrand, the torch had become one of Helen’s hallmarks. It was something else, however, which encouraged experts to re-label the kore ‘Eleni ’. The discovery, elsewhere at the site, of sections of a relief made of hard, local limestone, showing two curiously shaped caps, make the identification of the statue with Helen almost certain.

Here, it seems, represented by their trademark headgear, were the Dioscuri, Helen’s brothers, Castor and Pollux, the twins who, in Greek legend, had rescued Helen as a young girl from the clutches of Theseus. On their crowns were their characteristic emblems, ‘omphalos-like cones wreathed with olive leaves and surmounted with six-pointed stars’. There are stone carvings of similar design from Sparta, and Rome too, where Helen is also flanked by her brothers; a trio of heavenly beings.

What Professor Crowfoot and his team had found in Palestine was a religious precinct dating from, at the very latest, the 2nd century AD and vehemently destroyed around the middle of the 4th century: the epoch of some of the fiercest battles between Christians and pagans. A precinct devoted to mystical, possibly astrological worship. And there at the middle, standing well over a metre tall, was a gaudy, celestial Helen.

The 'C's coming straight to mind -

Q: (L) Why is it called Christianity? Isn't Christianity strictly related to Christianity as we know it?

A: Oh no! The word was co-opted and everything you know of as Christianity is distorted. For example, the earliest "Christ" was a woman.

Which was also a revelation of sorts, realising then that I really couldn't care less whether Caesar was Jesus, or even if Simon was Paul or some cool Gnostic rebel guy fighting the good fight.

The main game feels like it's elsewhere...

 

[Laura]

Which was also a revelation of sorts, realising then that I really couldn't care less whether Caesar was Jesus, or even if Simon was Paul or some cool Gnostic rebel guy fighting the good fight.

The main game feels like it's elsewhere...

Part of your problem is not having a clear and consistent line of thinking from paleolithic times to now.

The earliest Christ who was a woman was likely paleolithic.

Then, you are having problems with Paul and the gender of "Sophia" without having a full field of knowledge about the development of these terms along the timeline.

A thousand books or so should fix you right up.

 

[goyacobol]

God love her

@gnosisxsophia, I find your obsession with the gender of the divine a bit misplaced and condescending. To treat the creator of the forum and it's followers with such disdain is not very becoming as I see it.

It's sad that we are fighting a gender war over the nature of the Universe.

You should also have considered by now that 6D and 7D are most likely genderless.

The Cs being 6th density are both male and female (that is if one gives credence/faith to this forum and Laura's work).

Session October 1994:

Q: (L) Are you prepared to answer my questions fully and completely tonight?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Are you a male or female?

A: Both.

Q: (L) Are all Cassiopaeans both male and female?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Do you reproduce in anyway?

A: We are Light.

Q: (L) Have the Cassiopaeans ever been in physical bodies?

A: Ever is subjective.

Q: (L) Okay, at any point in space time have you occupied physical bodies?

A: Have, will and do.

Q: (L) Are you talking about the simultaneous past present and future?

A: Omnipresent.

Session 11 February 1995:

Q: Okay, who do we have with us tonight?

A: Sorran.

Q: And where are you from?

A: Cassiopaea.

Q: (DM) Are you male or female?

A: There is no gender here.

If 7th density (the highest density according to the Cs) is unity then both male and female (or whatever) would be included as one.

Session 13 January 1996:

Q: (P) Next question: How does one determine if they are channeling a 3rd density dead dude, or a higher density being?

A: Corrections and clarifications needed: "Dead Dudes" are 5th density beings. Either they are stuck in 3rd density, or they are communicating from 5th density, not 3rd density!! They are not 3rd density! 1st density includes all physical matter below the level of consciousness. 6th density is uniform in the level pattern of lightness, as there is complete balance on this density level, and the lightness is represented as knowledge. 7th density is union with the one... it is timeless in every sense of the word, as its "essence" radiates through all that exists in all possible awareness realms. The light one sees at the termination of each conscious physical manifestation is the union, itself. Remember, 4th density is the first that includes variable physicality!! Ponder this carefully!!! And, remember, there is only one "God," and that the creator includes all that is created and vice versa!

 

[gnosisxsophia]

A thousand books or so should fix you right up.

Thank you Laura,

Yes I continue chipping away.

I find your obsession with the gender of the divine a bit misplaced and condescending. To treat the creator of the forum and it's followers with such disdain is not very becoming as I see it.

G’day mate,

Thanks for the feedback.

The phrase is actually one of high praise where I come from, akin to ‘blood’s worth bottling’.

You should also have considered by now that 6D and 7D are most likely genderless.

The Cs being 6th density are both male and female (that is if one gives credence/faith to this forum and Laura's work).

Indeed -

...neither is the man without the woman,
neither the woman without the man in the Lord.

Any question regarding ‘gender of the divine’ is actually of very little personal interest, though admittedly an urge towards ‘the quest’ ,on the other hand, seems increasingly intrusive -

Man is born with Alpha. It is the purpose of this work to point out the way leading to Omega.

Mouravieffs ‘Lady of Thought / Dreams’, for a long time now, being more than mere abstraction -

...the basic concept of the "unique" romance... It reveals the yearning of the human heart secretly lamenting its profound loneliness. This romance constitutes the essential goal of esoteric work. The love in question will unite man to the being, unique for him...

Such that I lament the paucity of male commentary / shared experience on the subject and apologise for any appearance of obsession.

To Burn and to Serve: this is the motto of the Knight of the new Era. It should be engraved in fiery letters in his heart, and be constantly present in his mind.

All part of the ‘burn’ I guess?

Cheers

J

 

[Ennio]

In a continued discussion of the book, we had a part 2 show, linked below - and in realizing that there is more we'd like to cover of this material, we plan to do at least one more progam after this week's.

MindMatters: 'Adulthood of Spirit' - How To Leave Behind Childish Things And Become Spiritually Mature

Today we discuss the key practices and processes by which individuals come to know themselves, others, and the divine, according to Timothy Ashworth's interpretation of the Apostle Paul's thought in his book Paul's Necessary Sin. Since 'The Fall', humanity has suffered from a 'darkening of the mind' or an identification with the things created - our own physical existence - and a blindness to higher realities. But this devolution, or 'sin', has a constructive component built in, when the knowledge of sin, as sin, becomes recognized and pointed out for what it is. When an individual sees this in oneself, he or she can then make the choice to think and act differently. The state of sin was necessary in order to gain knowledge about the nature of good and evil.

Paul saw this potential transformation as a way for people not only to form a better connection to others, but also as a path towards humanity's greater and more direct connection to God; a vivifying experience that raised the children of humanity into adults - who no longer required 'the laws' as a guide to living - but whose internal and living connection with the 'unseen' could then direct their lives: what Paul calls "righteousness through faith".